While I partially agree with what you have to say, that is an incredibly simplistic way to look at a complicated situation.
While I partially agree with what you have to say, that is an incredibly simplistic way to look at a complicated situation.
When two people are married, they compromise their jobs, their futures and goals for each other and that is where the entitlement to each other's assets come from. We twist, turn and squirm to fit each other's needs.
The entitlement to money makes perfect sense, but I believe how much one is entitled to is in need of revision. No matter how much someone makes, taking half of their assets seems almost like theft.
Exactly. While the amounts awarded might need some fine tuning, the law itself (and the idea behind it) is sound.
Some fine tuning? The law is sound? What did she do to earn that money? What did she do that's so much different than what a wife of a normal guy does? The only thing different in this case is that her man was a successful athlete. She did nothing to earn that money.
What about all the women out there that want to get married/knocked up by a rich guy simply so they can get a huge settlement when she takes off? It's not right.
There are literally torrents of idiocy dribbling of some of people's mouths here. Fine tuning? The woman just got paid 150 million dollars for the incredibly daunting task of "being a trophy wife". That's fine tuning in the same way that doing surgery with a ninja sword would require some fine tuning.
Guess what else Jordan's wife probably got, and what women almost invariably get? THE KIDS. Your argument conveniently leaves that out. If the man is the breadwinner and the wife raised the kids, it's not fair that afterwards she should just an assload of money to "continue her standard of living" AND custody of the children. She didn't continue her career to raise the kids, so after the divorce, she gets to keep the kids to not invalidate her choice in life. The guy gets ass raped financially AND loses the kids except on the weekends (if he's lucky).
The alimony system isn't a nicely run system that needs a little fine tuning. It is an outmoded, broken system that feminists always conveniently ignore when whining and crying about deserving equal treatment, and it needs a major overhaul.
Ask any man that works in family law if the process is fair. Hell, you could ask most women and get the same answer. The system blows goats if you're a dude.
I will agree that she shouldn't get that much, but I'll also have to say that MJ is a know asshole, and was well-known as a cheat. He had women all over, for much of the time they were married. Very well-known fact.
Likely, Juanita knew this, and just dealt with it, until it got too blatant.
Loved MJ as a player, but as a human being, he is down somewhere around "bunghole" level.
Likely, Juanita knew this, and just dealt with it, until it got too blatant.
Loved MJ as a player, but as a human being, he is down somewhere around "bunghole" level.
CKent
Diamond Member
- Aug 17, 2005
- 9,020
- 0
- 0
There is no entitlement to each others' assets, it's lopsided almost fully in favor of women. You do have a bit of a point, but it seems rather idealistic. In the real world it seems like for every woman who receives just compensation for sacrifices made to better the marriage and children if applicable, 5 more legally rob some poor guy blind. And men apparently never make sacrifices to better a marriage and any children they may have, since they never get a dime. Tell me, what sacrifices did the wives in the marriages the OP mentioned make? They had to raise kids? No, they could afford an army of nannies. They could have had their own career? Marriage didn't seem to stop their husbands from persuing their careers.
Alimony has its roots in a time when one income could sustain most households and it was socially unacceptable for women to work, outside of a select few industries in which they were generally underpaid. A time when women were viewed more as property than people and were fully financially dependent on their husbands almost to the point children are to their parents. This is no longer the case, why is the law unchanged?
That's beside the point, we decide legal & financial matters based on what is fair and just, not whether we like someone. Though as an aside if you're looking for monogamous male professional athletes you'll be in for a lifetime of disappointment
The fact of the matter is that it doesn't matter whether it's a man or a woman, the one with the most money is the one who's going to pay. It's just that until very recently it was always the man making the most money and when they split it was the money he earned that divided between the two. It goes pretty much the same way when it's the woman making the big bucks, you just don't hear about it as much because it's still usually the man making the most. The husbands of Britney Spears, Jennifer Lopez (twice), Kirstie Alley, Halle Berry, Paula Zahn, Anne Heche, Drew Barrymore, Liza Minnelli, Lisa Marie Presley, Janet Jackson, etc. didn't just walk away with what they'd brought into the marriage. And the husbands of Jessica Simpson, Reese Witherspoon, Whitney Houston, etc. certainly did alright in the divorces from their wealthier wives.
Nope, seems to me that the times they are a changin' and we are progressing to the point when one day, you too, will be able to invest 18 years of your life in a marriage with a cheating wife to be as "lucky" as the former Mrs. Jordan.
Nope, seems to me that the times they are a changin' and we are progressing to the point when one day, you too, will be able to invest 18 years of your life in a marriage with a cheating wife to be as "lucky" as the former Mrs. Jordan.
Obviously, you missed the point, so I'll explain it for you: I don't think that any spouse should be entitled to that much money....nobody needs that much, including the person that made it......but that's the law.Originally posted by: CKent
That's beside the point, we decide legal & financial matters based on what is fair and just, not whether we like someone. Though as an aside if you're looking for monogamous male professional athletes you'll be in for a lifetime of disappointment
But in this case, being that MJ is a first-class asshole...and I don't mean because he constantly cheated on his wife....he's just an asshole, wife or not......anyway, because he's an asshole, I don't feel sorry that he had to pay, and I especially don't feel sorry for him since he's not only an asshole, but a cheating asshole.
Clear?
Whoozyerdaddy
Lifer
- Jun 27, 2005
- 19,216
- 1
- 61
this really reminds me of that crappy movie intolerable cruelty that i have no idea why i saw. how much did she work? just another reason to not marry or if you do marry sign an agreement stating that each person gets the same amount of money that he had when the couple first married.
You really are incredibly persistent.
It's amazing how you can so know all the finer points of another person's life without any actual knowledge! Maybe I should give it a try too, assuming everything. Certainly will make me more forceful in my opinions. Oh, and I can't forget the other key to success, always call everyone else an idiot.
If you know everything, you'd certainly know that MJ is not your typical husband, Juanita is not a trophy wife, and MJ doesn't exactly have the best off-the-court lifestyle that would be more warranting of gaining custody of kids. And you certainly know that all divorce cases are different, and just because the outcome fits into your preconceived notions of how wrong the world is, doesn't make it true. And no amount of calling others idiots is going to get you closer to any truth.
Taking an outcome, then guessing at the facts that lead to the outcome, brilliant!
P.S. custody is usually decided based on what's the best situation for the children, not what's best for Agentbolt.
If you are rich and you care that much about money don't get married or get a pre-nup. Especially if you are going to cheat on your wife with TONS of other women anyways. I don't see how anyone can feel sorry for him when it's that simple. He made the decision to marry her knowing this could happen.
0roo0roo
No Lifer
- Sep 21, 2002
- 64,795
- 84
- 91
where feminists went wrong. instead of going for fairness in the system we have gender warfare. enough to care for children is just, this is absurd lottery winning bs. they fought for the rights, but not the responsibility. you don't get half of a persons net worth for sleeping with them. no fair minded person could even pretend the value of a wife to rich folks is worth that many millions, even if you pretend they were paid staff to raise their own children it wouldn't amount to more than a million, and that would be the best paid nanny in the world. add in a bit of hooker money and it still doesn't add up to 150 million. its definetly made a mockery of marriage. forget blaming homosexuals and all that nonsense when you have a system that is broken in the first place.
Steven Speilberg, Tom Cruise, Harrison Ford...add Michael Jordan to the "My wife got $100mil+ in our divorce settlement Club"
Blah blah blah. Aren't you the id- incredibly intelligent person who went off on some pitiful tirade about the Craigslist house? About how every single person who took something should be prosecuted? All the while having no examples/insight to support your claim from a legal standpoint? And then you quietly dropped most of your point when people were pointing out the gaping holes in your logic? And eventually resorted to whining about how "mean" I am when going about arguing?
You're no good at this, arguing with you is as tiresome and ineffective as debating quantum mechanics with a 3 year old that is in the middle of eating its own poop. You're simply not smart enough to carry on an interesting argument, sorry. Feel free to keep following me around in threads and attempting to make snide comments, however. I'm going to ignore them, in much the same way I ignore insane people on street corners making screaming proclamations of the end of time, but I'll bet someday, just maybe, someone in the thread will read your puling little comeback and not laugh at you.
Keep reaching for that rainbow, buddy.
Normally I'm against this stuff but MJ's philandering was hopelessly public, he had gambling and drinking problems.
The guy is a total f'ing craphole of a man, if I had known about this when I was younger I certainly wouldn't have admired him as much as I did.
The guy is a total f'ing craphole of a man, if I had known about this when I was younger I certainly wouldn't have admired him as much as I did.
I understand this fully, and I agree wholeheartedly that the system is being abused. But, people have to understand that certain laws were placed in order to bring some sort of civility to our society and to compensate those who suffered and sacrificed for their families. This may be idealistic in most cases now since things have changed so much in terms of gender roles, but I still feel as if the law itself is a good thing. I don't see how anyone can disagree that compensation for companionship and sacrifice shouldn't be awarded (I know people have made up their minds most of the time about each case, but we don't know the full story to each case, so let's try and be objective as possible).
There is abuse, but to take away the right to assets of legitimate housewives and househusbands (?) is not the best course of action to correct the perversion of the law by some.
I think the criteria in which we should evaluate whether or not assets should be split is to determine what sacrifices were made and the level of sincerity and genuineness of the marriage. But this is impossible, so lo and behold, the law to prevent abuse, ironically being abused.
To get rid of this law, would do more damage than good. What we need is a revision that takes into account abuse.
Siddhartha
Lifer
- Oct 17, 1999
- 12,505
- 3
- 81
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter